The plaintiff and appellee in the case is the USA. The defendants and appellants of the case are Julio Acuna (Chino), Jose Miguel Battle, Jr. (Miguelito) a.k.a. Jose Miguel Battle Rodriguez, a.k.a. Jose R. Battle, a.k.a. Mike Battle, a.k.a. Mike Jr., a.k.a. Mike Battle, a.k.a. Jose Rodriguez Battle.
Appeal Case
The co-defendants of the case, Jose Battle, Jr. and Julio Acuna are appealing the conviction and sentences that they received, for various reasons. A New York Family Lawyer said the defendants are contending that in district court a number of errors in their case were made, which include: (a) denial of the motion for dismissal of the indictment of Battle for the because it was barred by the limitations statute; (b) response of a jury question to the defense of Battle that directed the jury to assess the instructions and reformulated the question; (c) departure before Battle’s sentence was given; (d) imposing sentences that were not reasonable on both defendants; and (e) entering a order of forfeiture to Battle that was disproportionate to the crime committed.
Case Procedure Background
The defendants of the case were indicted by the federal grand jury on the 31st of May in 2005. The charges were conspiracy and violation of 18 U.S.C. by participating in a criminal endeavor through patterns of racketeering activities. The defendants were engaging in activities that were illegal on a large scale through an international enterprise that is referred to by the name “Cuban Mafia.”
The selection for the jury started on the 9th of January in 2006 and the trial proceeded for over 5 months. A New York Criminal Lawyer said the jury reached their verdict on the 20th of July in 2006. Both the defendants were found guilty of conspiring to commit racketeering. Acuna was sentenced to life in prison and a 1.4 billion dollar money judgment was issued against him. Battle received a sentence of188 months in prison and 3 years of supervised release. He was also ordered forfeiture of a number of assets. In addition, the court entered a RICO judgment of forfeiture for $642 million to Battle that represented the gambling profits earned by the enterprise from the year 1979 through 1988.
Case Facts and Verdict for Appeal
When considering how reasonable the sentences are that were imposed by the district court, some facts must be considered.
In the case of the defendants, it is proven that he was a member of an enterprise of organized crime that ran a gambling ring in both New Jersey and New York. A Queens Family Lawyer said this organized crime enterprise has a long history and there were several cases involving murder, racketeering, and other illegal acts brought against several of the members throughout the years.
During the trial evidence was provided to the fact that both men were involved in the enterprise to some degree. The question is whether or not the forfeiture order is reasonable.
After looking over the case we find that although the forfeiture sum is quite large, it is not unreasonable. A Nassau County Family Lawyer said it was found that the RICO offense at one point was generating a sum of between one and a half million to two million dollars a week in gambling proceeds. This involved acts of violence and money laundering to protect the unlawful funds. For this reason, we deny the appeal and affirm the amount of $642 million in the forfeiture order.
The law offices of Stephen Bilkis & Associates can help you through any legal problem that you may have. There are some circumstances where it is better to let an expert in the field help you through. We have offices located throughout the metropolitan area of New York. You may contact any of our offices to set up a free consultation at any time.